Free Will: Raskolnov's Personal Identity

Raskolnikov’s brusque affectation eventually yields to his predilection for salvation and redemption. He ultimately comes to the realization that he is not worthy of being “extraordinary” because of the crippling guilt that followed his murder of the pawnbroker. Raskolnikov reflects upon the implications of his crime on his psyche, “I murdered myself, not her! I crushed myself once for all,

In order to understand Raskolnikov’s guilt, it is important to understand the religious influences at work in the time period and place he lived in. In St. Petersburg where Raskolnikov lives, there are strong Christian influences from the Eastern Orthodox Church. The Church condemns killing people with few exceptions. Although is not a devout believer, these influences are still at work in the book. It is clear that Raskolnikov is struggling to fight God away because, as he says that “once God’s will gets mixed up in it, nothing will be done” (389). He acknowledges that the guilt he has is God’s doing, and he struggles internally to get rid of it. The idea that he is not able to feel good about the murder that he knows improved society. He states that “what bothers [him] is this permission according to conscience” (253). Even though he wants to establish his own moral code, it is impossible for him to do so because of the influence of religion.

    Raskolnikov shares similar traits to Svidrigailov; however, unlike Svidrigailov, he’s is burdened by a conscience that wants him to do the right thing. Rask has two sides to him, a dark side that is similar to that of Svidrigailov, and a good side that feels remorse for killing the pawnbroker. Rask has a bit of Svidrigailov in him because he doesn’t believe that what he did was wrong and has a wicked side to him that comes out when he sees the pawnbroker, especially in his dream where “he began to smash the old woman on the head” with a vengeance because of how much he

    This is how Raskolnikov is able to commit his crime: his intellectual side ignores his conscience and is able to commit the crime in a rational and orderly way. It is his dual character that serves as his punishment. One side of him is able to commit the murders, so the other must bear the punishment. He is tortured by the cruelty in mankind, and yet he himself is able to repeat it.

When Raskolnikov was a student he enjoyed the debate and human contact, but also strived for acceptance. He had a dual nature to himself, which could be characterized by his cold intelligence, which separated him from society, and his compassionate side. After Raskolnikov murdered Alyona and Lizaveta Ivanovna

“I wanted to find out then and quickly whether I was a louse like everybody else or a man. Whether I can step over barriers or not, whether I dare stoop to pick up or not, whether I am a trembling creature or whether I have the right…” (329). This quote shows the reason why Raskolnikov wanted to commit the murder. He wants to prove that he has the power to control his own life.

Being the protagonist in Crime and Punishment, Raskolnikov is subject to most ridicule and analysis for his moral ambiguity and outlandish views. After reading about his dreadful murder of Alyona and Lizaveta Ivanovna, many come to the conclusion that Raskolnikov is purely evil. His lack of guilt and belief of justification for his crime surely points readers in this direction. Raskolnikov remains convinced that he is superior and that it was his duty to kill such a worthless person. Although some may view this as evilness, others may perceive it as downright ignorant. His atypical way of thinking doesn’t necessarily make him evil, but that is how some comprehend it. At certain points in the story, we see Raskolnikov not as a deranged man, but instead as a compassionate human being. After the murder, we see him carrying out various charitable acts, perhaps as an attempt to atone for his unforgivable crime. For example, we see some good in him when he gives Sonya’s family twenty rubbles after Marmeladov passes on. We also see this when he attempts to rescue a drunk girl from a man by giving her money for a taxi. As much as Raskolnikov expresses that he was justified in his actions, through his mental and physical illnesses it is apparent that he feels some guilt about it. This guilt makes him seem at least a little bit more human. For these reasons, when all is said and done, it is difficult to determine

The first matter to be noted is that this view is in no way in contradiction to science. Free will is a natural phenomenon, something that emerged in nature with the emergence of human beings, with their

	Raskolnikov presents evidence of his true mental state, and that he wants to be exposed before his peers for the good of society, which allows the reader to see him not as evil, but terribly misguided as a tainted product of the world he has been forced in to. First, he forgets to lock the door and is forced to kill another woman who walks in unexpectedly during his crime. Next, with the door still open, he dallies several minutes washing his axe, taking even more time to scrutinize his clothing for traces of blood, all seemingly in the unconscious hope that someone will walk in on him. So

Dostoevsky’s believes in existentialism, and the idea that individual freedom is essential to the development of the mind (Copleston 165). He speaks through his characters by presenting them as “continually defeated as a result of their choices” ( “Existentialism”). Though Raskolnikov is allowed to make his own decisions he ended up making the wrong ones. He is forced to face his consequences of the murders he committed. Dostoevsky’s blend of philosophy with the novel allows

In every part of the book it is talked about. In the first part it talked about, and explained the state of Raskolnikov’s living situation. In the second book it talks about the living conditions of other people around him. Now, in the third part, it is about the poverty of being. In the second chapter, he has a fight with his mother and sister and pushes them away, and wakes up the next morning deeply regretting it. He judges himself harshly, about everything. He states “was it thinkable that such a creature as Avdotya Romanovna would be marrying an unworthy man…?” (Dostoevsky, 337). Raskolnikov is so used to being unworthy and unfit that he does not even believe he is worthy of love and happiness. He also regards himself of having a “coarse and envious heart” (Dostoevsky, 338) when he is thinking over the events from the previous night. He considers himself a lost cause, and nothing he can do will ever change that, so for that reason he decides to “… not ask forgiveness” and to “say nothing” (Dostoevsky, 338). Raskolnikov never puts himself in a good light. He sees himself as a person who is “a cynic and a dirty sloven”. His poverty of being really affects him, and causes him to see the world with dirty, broken glasses. He has no care for most people, and a lot of the time ends up pushing people away from himself that he should be bringing in closer. In the grand scheme

He shows egotistical, cowardly, and humane trait. Raskolnikov’s egocentric behaviors make him only care for himself and relate every situation back to himself. However, his humane side is occasionally seen throughout varied events. Similarly, these characteristics brought out his divided character. Raskolnikov continues to be thought-provoking character who has matured as a character in some

For obvious reasons Raskolnikov did not want to admit the crime he committed. He believed that to be above the law one can’t be punished for his crime because therefore he is submitting to the law. He rationalized his actions by maintining the belief that the ends justify the means. He believed that

Therefore Amoia notes that, "as the implications of the deed unfold in his conscience, Raskolnikov attempts to jusitfy his actions as a 'rational' crime" (53). Though he understands that he will be able to escape the physical punishement for the crime, he has yet to comprehend the burden that comes with such an unethical action. Even when Porfiry suggests that the criminal who murdered the pawnbroker may run away but, "psychologically he won't escape" (287), Raskolnikov becomes infuriated and accuses Porfiry of trying to scare him. However, Raskolnikov fails to understand the meaning behind Porfiry's words perhaps because he still chooses not to rely on his conscience and confess to the crime.While the superiority complex sets him apart from the society in the beginning, his piercing conscience distances him from people later on in the novel. He refuses to speak to Razumuikhin or to his family. It only before he goes to jail, that he decides to see his mother. Even when he does so, he is relieved that Dunya is not in the room. He later admits to Dunya that he doesn't, "even remember why [I] even went" to meet his mother. His conscience does not allow him to face his loved ones and eventually, he tries to isolate himself from society. While Raskolnikov tries to alienate himself from his own conscience, he is alienating himself from humanity in general.

Raskolnikov lives an ordinary life as an ordinary man. He is a good man and has a good heart, but he soon commits a crime that will forever change his life. Raskolnikov is a good man; I believe he is kind, generous, and selfless. Now, how are all of these positive traits found in a murderer? I think was caught in a psychotic moment, his mental state was not all there, and he had a dream, he made a plan, and he committed this terrible crime. A good example of Raskolnikov being a kind hearted person, and selfless is when he sees a young girl at the end of the street, he sees by her a rough looking man staring at her. He starts to get very worried what this man might do to this young girl. He goes down the street to get this young girl, and he pays for a taxi to get her home. This was so generous, and small yet so impactful. Raskolnikov cared about what might happen to this young girl, and did something about it. This showed how selfless Raskolnikov is, and what a kind heart he has. I think this shows Raskolnikov’s true character. From here, he makes some terrible decisions, and is engulfed by guilt, but I believe he is a generous, kindhearted person. In this book, Crime And Punishment, Raskolnikov goes from being an ordinary man with an ordinary life to a murderer, tortured by guilt, haunted by the memory of his crime, and him finding himself again in society after the murders.